Re: [RFC PATCH 0/9] Introduce housekeeping subsystem

[Chris Metcalf]

On 7/21/2017 9:21 AM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> I'm leaving for two weeks so this is food for thoughts in the meantime :)
>
> We have a design issue with nohz_full: it drives the isolation features
> through the *housekeeping*() functions: kthreads, unpinned timers,
> watchdog, ...
>
> But things should work the other way around because the tick is just an
> isolation feature among others.
>
> So we need a housekeeping subsystem to drive all these isolation
> features, including nohz full in a later iteration. For now this is a
> basic draft. In the long run this subsystem should also drive the tick
> offloading (remove residual 1Hz) and all unbound kthreads.
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/frederic/linux-dynticks.git
> 	nohz/0hz
>
> HEAD: 68e3af1de5db228bf6c2a5e721bce59a02cfc4e1

For the series:

Reviewed-by: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

I spotted a few typos that you should grep for and fix for your next 
version:
"watchog", "Lets/lets" instead of "Let's/let's", "overriden" (should 
have two d's).

The new housekeeping=MASK boot option seems like it might make it a little
irritating to specify nohz_full=MASK as well.  I guess if setting 
NO_HZ_FULL_ALL
implied "all but housekeeping", it becomes a reasonably tidy solution.  
To make
this work right you might have to make the housekeeping option early_param
instead so its value is available early enough.

--
Chris Metcalf, Mellanox Technologies
http://www.mellanox.com